JaxPort Dredging Fiasco?

[bl8jaxnative]

They certainly implied it if they didn't explicitly say it given that they didn't address the impact of the bridge and power line heights and any shortcomings of equipment on the docks as part of the dredging approval process.  Surely, some one/people at the Port knew these issues would have to be eventually addressed to extract the full value of the dredging going back to the very start of bringing up this project. 

Bridge clearance has always been a known limitation.  Always.  Savannah, Brunswick, et al. have similar issues.   IIRC Savannah's dredging has allowed for ships that are too big to to fit under that US 17 bridge downtown.   Just because you don't have that, does not mean the dredging doesn't provide value.

You do things in iterations.  The dredging allows for bigger ships.   As bigger ships come, you work on putting the next piece in place.

And it's not just the bridge, the port itself, the cranes, the storage space, et al all factor into the size of the ship that's going to come.

TraPac + their customers will experiment with what works + doesn't work.   If the ship made it to the port, then whatever cover story they use, the physical environment allows for it.   The trick is does it make sense given the market.  Are they better off using that ship to ship from China - EU?   Or better using Halifax or Houston instead of Jacksonville.  There's a lot of factors in play.

[jaxlongtimer]

^ I don't have a problem with stepped improvements.  I do have a problem when someone knows the whole game plan but withholds substantial parts of it or the risks to getting a full return on investment until the plan is underway and it can't be reversed or salvaged if the later parts can't be fully accomplished.  It's called full disclosure and government entities doing these types of projects should be held to the same strict standards public companies are required by the SEC to live up to in terms of disclosing business risks, the competitive landscape and operational/financial trends.  No one likes surprises.

The JaxPort approach damages the credibility of the acting party which may ultimately impair their ability to get approval for future requests.  This is part of the parallel with JTA's advocacy for the Skyway/U2C.

[bl8jaxnative]

Just because they didn't have a copy of their master plan FedExed to your doorstep doesn't mean there aren't plans.  Please, that's a pretty preposterous claim.   

Again, you do things in pieces.  Dredging is needed regardless of bridge raising, et al.   Things like Bridge raising just enable that next class, that next size of ship.

First, you get those 6,500 TEU vessels to come on a regular basis on various routes.  Then you work on put things in place for the next phase.

[jaxlongtimer]

Nate Monroe does a great job summarizing why the port dredging is a fiasco in the making.  Either the dredging is totally inadequate to host the largest ships the Port claimed to be going after or it was a sneaky first step to suckering taxpayers and JEA ratepayers to (a) pay for a second dredging to 50 feet from 47 feet and (b) raising JEA power lines from 175 feet to 200 feet over the river at a cost of $100+ million. 

Typical Jax underhanded dealing and transparency.  Just like with JTA and the AV's and JEA and its plans to sell itself.  Truly scandalous.  The appointed boards of these agencies are nothing but rubberstamps and totally politicized.  When is the last time one of these boards rejected a staff plan?  It is clear that no one is looking out for the citizens of Jacksonville.

COMMENTARY | Jacksonville Port Authority officials have for months circulated a study they believe demonstrates that a series of high-voltage transmission lines that cross far above the St. Johns River are a navigational hazard to massive cargo ships that could one day use Jacksonville's port terminals.

Convincing the federal government to consider the lines a safety hazard could ultimately force JEA to raise them, bury them or move them — a risky endeavor that could cost ratepayers in Northeast Florida as much as $100 million depending on what option is selected.

"With larger vessels being phased in, the transmission lines will create a safety risk that would limit the number of vessels that can enter the Jacksonville Harbor, reducing our economic competitiveness," Eric Green, Jaxport's CEO, wrote to the U.S. Coast Guard in August. "Removing this restriction will eliminate all future safety impediments."

But a closer look at JaxPort's study shows the alleged threat to be far more speculative than Green's letter suggests.

The study simulated the arrival of two ships that are far larger than any that have ever called on JaxPort. The ships, if they were fully loaded, would also need favorable tides or deeper water even after the completion of a current dredging project that will create a 47-foot shipping channel.

And, remarkably, the study simulated the arrival of those massive vessels in a St. Johns River with 50 feet of water, three feet deeper than the current project, slated for completion in about a year, is set to go.

The smaller of the two vessels simulated — a ship that can hold 14,000 20-foot cargo containers (or, a 14,000 TEU vessel) — drafts at 47.5 feet, meaning a fully loaded vessel of that size would have to wait for favorable tides even after completion of the current 47-foot dredging project.

Even with the 50 feet of water the study assumed, the largest of the two vessels JaxPort simulated — an 18,000 TEU ship — drafts at 52.5 feet, so it was only simulated navigating through the channel at high tide with an additional 5 feet of water added.

The largest vessel to have ever called Jacksonville was the Kota Pekarang in 2019, which is smaller than 12,000 TEU.

In short, even if JaxPort officials hope to one day see such large ships, the study they've been circulating provides dubious evidence that there is an urgent or perhaps even long-term safety need to raise JEA's transmission lines — a project that itself could take years to complete. And it assumes removing the lines is one of only a few barriers to prosperity.

In reality, even with 47 feet of water, JaxPort would remain poorly suited to handle an 18,000 TEU vessel and less than ideal for a 14,000 TEU ship of the dimensions it modeled. It would also still have to compete for that expanded business with better situated and larger ports along the East Coast.

In answers to follow-up questions provided after this column initially posted, JaxPort argued the study "validates" that a 47-foot channel is "adequate" to accommodate 14,000 TEU ships and "up to 18,000 TEUs under certain tidal and loading conditions."

But the study didn't examine a 47-foot river; it only considered a 50-foot St. Johns shipping channel, so the port authority's assertion the study made any conclusions about a 47-foot river is simply not convincing.

What the study actually seems to suggest is that the $484 million dredging project underway is probably inadequate if JaxPort leaders truly intend to pursue 18,000 TEU vessels in the future. It reads more like an initial effort to lay the groundwork for a future ask.

Answers a port spokesperson provided also point out that ships often don't arrive fully loaded, meaning they require less than their maximum draft. "A harbor depth that's close to — or at — the vessel's Design Draft would typically only be necessary for a port to be a first or last port-of-call for a fully loaded vessel — not for ports in the middle of a service string rotation," the statement said.

JaxPort officials disagreed when I asked them whether it was correct to interpret the study as an indication they're already eyeing a 50-foot dredge.

"Our focus is completing the 47-foot deepening project through Blount Island so that we can provide the community with the project's return on investment as soon as possible," the authority said in a statement.

JEA's high-voltage transmission lines sit 175 feet above the river, which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has previously determined provided more than enough air draft to accommodate the largest vessels that will call on JaxPort terminals after the completion of the 47-foot dredging project. JaxPort's study, however, now says the transmission lines must provide nearly 200 feet of air clearance, based on the analysis of the two ship designs it modeled.

JaxPort says in the years since the Army Corps made its original finding, nearly a decade ago, "ships have grown much faster than anyone in the industry could have anticipated."

But there were critics who believed the Army Corps had understated the pace of growth in the size of vessels being built. The St. Johns Riverkeeper explicitly challenged that U.S. Army Corps finding in federal court. A ports analyst working with the Riverkeeper said in 2017 the Army Corps' 47-foot dredge study relied on outdated information about vessel size and composition. Both the Army Corps and JaxPort defended that finding in court.

If the Army Corps had determined at the time the lines needed to be raised, it would have added cost to the dredging project, potentially throwing off the slightly favorable cost-benefit analysis and jeopardizing the project's ability to attract federal funding. That's one reason why some critics believe the Army Corps made some of the questionable choices it did when studying the project: Strip it down and make it appear as cheap as possible.

Now, however, as the project is underway, those hidden costs could be emerging: Among them, the issue of whether JEA's lines need to be higher.

It's worth pointing out Asian trade — which requires deep water — makes up less than 30 percent of JaxPort's core business. Trade with Puerto Rico and the Caribbean and automobile shipping — which have long been JaxPort's bread and butter — don't need such depths. Yet dredging has consumed enormous amounts of taxpayer money and generated public controversy.

Even with deeper water, JaxPort officials will have to convince industry players to include Jacksonville in more Asian trade business with aggressive marketing. Big ships won't arrive on their own.

Success on that front is far from a sure thing.

Asaf Ashar, the ports analyst who worked with the Riverkeeper and (accurately) warned the Army Corps was using outdated vessel information, said in a report that Jacksonville is a "secondary" port and will likely "remain a secondary port, with or without dredging." He questioned the theory that some of the largest ships being made today would ever have interest in calling Jacksonville before bigger ports in Savannah, Charleston, Miami, New York and Norfolk.

"In fact, despite the dire prediction (by a JaxPort consultant) that the 'Asian market will likely disappear ... by 2015,' JaxPort's Asian cargo has been steadily growing, even with the existing channel," he wrote.

Ashar suggested JaxPort will continue to benefit from "feedering": When a shipper takes some of the cargo dropped off at a bigger port by a bigger vessel and transports it to a smaller secondary port with a smaller vessel.

Notably, the U.S. Army Corps' initial recommendation was to dredge only to 45 feet; JaxPort requested the additional 2 feet.

I asked JaxPort whether it had any indication the massive ships it modeled in its study — the 14,000 and 18,000 TEU vessels that require more than 175 feet of air clearance — have any known plans of calling JaxPort in the future. A spokesperson didn't respond with any specifics, saying only that one of its terminal operators has made significant investments in modernizing Blount Island and wouldn't have done so if "they didn't expect to see more ships and increased cargo volumes."

The bottom line

JEA already helps pay for city services through an annual contribution to City Hall's general fund that exceeds $115 million. Above and beyond that, there are civic efforts JEA should and does participate in, including help extending water lines to some of Jacksonville's oldest neighborhoods and removing failing septic tanks that can pollute waterways.

Subsidizing port operations, however, should not be on that list. A church on the Westside, a nonprofit in the Northwest, a restaurant in Mandarin, a family off Hodges: These people and institutions should not have to pay for a project that will benefit private interests more than they already have.

The port was circumspect when I asked if they expected JEA ratepayers to pay to raise or bury the transmission lines. Talks between the two agencies are ongoing.

Perhaps JaxPort officials truly believe they can turn their secondary port into a major player. Maybe they've had visions of 18,000 TEU vessels anchored offshore. If they believe it strongly enough, they can find a different way to pay for it.

Raiding Jacksonville's public utility on such speculation should be a non-starter.

https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/columns/nate-monroe/2021/10/15/jaxport-dubiously-calls-jea-power-lines-st-johns-river-safety-hazard-nate-monroe/8452308002/

[Charles Hunter]

Raising the power lines to 200' would open up about one mile of berths along the south face of Blount Island that are west of the power lines. The channel between Blount Island and Dames Point is only 40' - so it would also have to be dredged to 50' to gain the full benefit of raising the power lines. How much will this cost? The western side of Dames Point would still be inaccessible due to the 175' clearance of the Dames Point Bridge. How many hundreds of millions would increasing its clearance cost?

Madness.  Madness.

[bl8jaxnative]

1/3 of the regions wealth comes from those ports.

Do y'll really want to risk kiling that all over a few feet?

[Charles Hunter]

What would be nice is if JaxPort, JEA, COJ, FDOT, ACOE, etc., were upfront about all the costs and impacts associated with expanding the port. These incremental reveals of, "Oh, the deepening is a good start, but we really need to raise the power lines ... raise the bridge ... build a new rail line to the railyards west of town ... deepen the Blount Island channel ... make the channel even deeper ..."

[fieldafm]

1/3 of the regions wealth comes from those ports.

LOLZ, wut?!!?

[acme54321]

The western side of Dames Point would still be inaccessible due to the 175' clearance of the Dames Point Bridge. How many hundreds of millions would increasing its clearance cost?

That number would probably have a B behind it the way things cost these days.

[Steve]

The western side of Dames Point would still be inaccessible due to the 175' clearance of the Dames Point Bridge. How many hundreds of millions would increasing its clearance cost?

That number would probably have a B behind it the way things cost these days.

Wouldn't you have to rebuild the bridge or go the tunnel route? I don't think you're fixing the 175ft thing easily.

[jaxoNOLE]

Apparently, the power lines were discussed and determined not to be an obstacle back in 2017 before the dredging began, though even the quote from JaxPort then left the door open to them changing their mind in the future:

The transmission lines aren't as visible as the nearby Dames Point bridge, but the cables are just as much of a restriction on the size of cargo ships that can sail under them on the way to unload at Jacksonville's port.

JaxPort officials, who are pursuing a $484-million river deepening project so Jacksonville can handle the next generation of jumbo-sized cargo ships, say the power lines don't pose an obstacle to their push to compete with other Southeast ports that also are deepening their harbors.

"As far as we're concerned, impacts down the road, maybe," JaxPort spokeswoman Nancy Rubin said. "Right now, the largest ships will be accommodated at Blount Island quite nicely."

https://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2017-07-21/power-lines-across-river-won-t-short-circuit-quest-bigger-ships-jaxport-says

Sounds to me like raising or burying the power lines is something they might need to pursue someday, not near term, so they could be testing the temperature of the water on the request to strategize for the real ask down the road.

[acme54321]

The western side of Dames Point would still be inaccessible due to the 175' clearance of the Dames Point Bridge. How many hundreds of millions would increasing its clearance cost?

That number would probably have a B behind it the way things cost these days.

Wouldn't you have to rebuild the bridge or go the tunnel route? I don't think you're fixing the 175ft thing easily.

Yeah the only way you're fixing that is with a new bridge.  I guess they could reuse part of the southern approach 

[jaxlongtimer]

Just because they didn't have a copy of their master plan FedExed to your doorstep doesn't mean there aren't plans.  Please, that's a pretty preposterous claim.   

Maybe you could share the master plan that you are so sure exists to this extent.  As a governmental entity, such plans, if they actually exist, are public information so you should be able to request it for sharing with us.  We await with bated breath.  Make sure they date back to before the dredging and weren't just recently "updated" to cover these issues.  And, again, if they exist why were they not more publicly transparent as we taxpayers are paying for this and are entitled to be in the know.

1/3 of the regions wealth comes from those ports.

Let me guess, another third is generated by the Jaguars and the last third by autonomous vehicles .  Please provide the source for this.  By the way, previous studies the Port produced to justify the dredging with their "economic impact" have been greatly discredited for counting impacts that are not attributable solely or at all to the Port or just overblown with unreasonably optimistic assumptions of the present or projections of the future (taking a cue from JTA doing the same for the Skyway/AV projects or JEA doing the opposite to try and support its sale).

[jaxlongtimer]

I wonder how JaxPort compares to Savannah after reading the below.  These are amazing numbers.  From talking to people in the know, Savannah is far more active right now that Jacksonville.  Not even close.

Savannah leads nation in tenant demand for warehouses, vacancy near historic lows

Georgia's largest coastal city leads the nation in tenant demand, a trend that should continue into the new year, industry experts say.

The nearly 25 million square feet of demand for warehouse space in Savannah is coming mostly from companies that need between 50,000 square feet and 1.5 million square feet, according to a third quarter report from Jones Lang LaSalle (NYSE: JLL). Savannah was the fourth-busiest port in North America during the first half of 2021 and broke records for total container volumes.....

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2021/11/09/savannah-industrial-market-leases-vacancy-tenant.html?utm_source=st&utm_medium=en&utm_campaign=ae&utm_content=ja&ana=e_ja_ae&j=25641361&senddate=2021-11-09

[Steve]

I'll find the link but yea....it isn't close. Port of LA and Long Beach are by far 1 and 2. NY/NJ is the #1 on the east coast, with Savannah comfortably in second. I want to say they're about 3X us, but not 100% sure.